*** UPDATE 2 *** No vote in Senate Exec. Caucuses will now meet to discuss what to do about the amendment, or any amendment. Then a vote on the override.

[ *** End Of Update *** ]

* Quinn’s legislative office has been making calls, but they haven’t succeeded in stopping an override of the concealed carry bill yet. If this is gonna be a “showdown,” then the governor will lose the battle…

“There will be a showdown in Springfield,” Quinn told the crowd gathered in Chicago for a bill signing on anti-gang legislation. Afterward he told reporters that lawmakers should examine his changes carefully.

“I don’t think they should override common sense. I don’t think they should compromise with public safety,” he said.

The political war, however, is already “won,” in Cook County, at least. The governor’s AV was a purely political document. It got him just what he wanted: Tons of publicity portraying him as an anti-gun, crime-fighting white knight.

“I was in five parades on the fourth of July. I didn’t hear one person complain about what I did,” says Governor Pat Quinn while speaking to a Chicago crowd. “I heard many people agree with what I did for common-sense gun safety laws.”

Those parades were all in the Chicago area. But here’s something else he said…

“I’ve been all across, uh, talking to a lot of people since last Tuesday, and the people of Illinois understand common sense.”

He couldn’t say he’s been all across Illinois, so he stopped himself short. Listen to his full presser…

“I would say to legislators tomorrow, ‘Do not genuflect before the National Rifle Association.’ They do not understand public safety in the Land of Lincoln.”

Quinn also said it was “total baloney” that he wasn’t involved with the concealed carry bill. As far as doing the hard work of crafting a bill, he definitely was not involved. Quinn didn’t want any sort of ownership of this legislation, so that’s why he stayed out of the negotiations and issued an AV.

Senate President John Cullerton said issues raised by Quinn’s changes were worth discussing and could come up again down the road.

“Even though the Senate president will be supporting the override so that we don’t waste any time getting reasonable regulations on the books, he did think that there are a lot of issues raised in the amendatory veto that are worth further discussion,” Cullerton spokeswoman Rikeesha Phelon said.

“Here’s the deal, we have a compromised bill and both sides of the aisle, both chambers have agreed to this. We’ve got a lot of votes in both chambers, I don’t think anybody wants to go back on their word, on the compromise,” explains bill sponsor Representative Brandon Phelps.

Phelps says lawmakers will attempt to override the governor’s changes in a special session on Tuesday, and he and other downstate lawmakers are confident they can do it.

“I imagine, based upon the votes that took place previously on the concealed carry legislation, that it will be overridden tomorrow, and that southern Illinois will lead the way,” says Representative John Bradley.

If lawmakers are successful in the override vote, the law would give State Police 180 days to implement the new program. Once that time is up, FOID card holders can apply for the $150 dollar, 5-year permit. State Police would be required to issue that permit within 90 days.

==If lawmakers are successful in the override vote, the law would give State Police 180 days to implement the new program. Once that time is up, FOID card holders can apply for the $150 dollar, 5-year permit. State Police would be required to issue that permit within 90 days.==

What is the earliest people will be allowed to carry with a CCW permit?

At the earliest the way it is written would be 180 days. if state police managed an instant turn around more likely 270 days or more. State police routinely miss the 90 day clock on Foids doubt this will be different.

One part of the AV that really galls me is Quinn’s attempt to redefine “concealed”. Any inadvertent exposure of your weapon or the outline of your weapon through your clothes would be criminalized. Of course, his real intent is to keep as many people from legally carrying as possible, so this is no real surprise…

The word I’ve gotten is that the Illinois State Police don’t want to be perceived as obstructionists.

In fact, they’ve already got a FAQ on the new carry law and it hasn’t even been enacted yet… (and hint: they don’t mention Quinn’s proposals… whoops, that’s embarrassing to our chief executive who has been a bit on the petulant side of late).

We’ll need to approve instructors and courses and that could come as soon as later this month if all goes well. Applications and so forth could be available later this month as well, best case, and processing of completed applications might come as soon as two or three months from now.

That’s best case.

This is Illinois.

A more realistic projection would be to say I think I’ll have mine by Christmas if all goes well.

I re-upped on my FOID 2 months before it expired. It took a total of 4 months for it to arrive. If that is any indication of how long it will take the SP to respond to my CC license I could be using a wheelchair to get out of the nursing home to go pick it up.

Agreed that seems like one of the most insidious parts of the veto. Of course the other part that struck me was the signage tweak. Between that and the no Alchohol whatsoever basically turns the bill from a restrictive permit to a permissive ban. About the only advantage from the way he has it written is you can carry in your car or sidewalk. At the moment i believe, and if i am wrong please correct, in most of the state you can already give permission to carry on your private property under existing law.

Mason, I agree - but the fully concealed provision in particular has the danger of sounding reasonable on the surface to low information legislators and voters. Quinn’s other changes are just ridiculous.

So, we have on one side - “ummmmmm”, with the predictable extremist view re everyone should be able to carry without ANY restrictions in the absence of any logic or precedent. On the other hand, we have STL throwing out the whole “gun nuts” provocation line right on schedule.

Also love how the “gun lobby” and the NRA are denigrated as crafting this bill.

Folks, HB-997 was our proposal, and even then it was not nearly as progressive as we would have liked to have seen it. Many states, such as Indiana, Missouri, Iowa, Wisconsin and Kentucky all have *much* more liberal laws and not a one of them had 74 people shot and twelve killed in any given city (or even the entire respective states!) last holiday weekend.

We, as gun rights advocates, were *not* a party to HB-183… that was done by Madigan himself, with some input from Cullerton and the City of Chicago.

When Madigan was done with it, he gave it back to Phelps to introduce and his message was “take it or leave it”.

We had neither a seat at the table, nor input on the contents. Of course, it’s worth mentioning that Quinn didn’t even want a seat at that table.

Frankly, from our side of looking at it, it’s a terrible bill.

But it’s better than what we have now and I believe it’s better than unregulated carry here in Illinois with a patchwork of local rules and regs that will lead to improper arrests and decades of litigation.

Much hand-wringing here for no good reason and misdirected anger and frustration.

Its my observation that when someone says “most people”, it means they have actually talked to very few people. If “most people” agree with Quinn, then why did “most people” not flood the GA with angry phone calls and why were there no livid editorials or letters to editors? “Most people” ARE sensible and see that current policies in Chicago are doing absolutely nothing to curb illegal use of guns, which is where the problem lies. “Most people” would love for the governor to sign this bill.

The Second amendment is no different than the First.
Your attempt at showing me as extreme shows yourself to be exactly that. Projection doesn’t work with thinking people.

You see, your “no restrictions” claim is garbage. Using a firearm to rape rob and murder remains illegal (restricted).

I ask you honestly - are you in the dick Durbin camp of ideas that only a government defined “journalist” is allowed freedom of the press? Bro, everyone has that right, just as they do the right to carry. Innocent until proven guilty! Or do you oppose that concept? Hmmmm?

Wordslinger- nah, cuz I like it when everybody has their say - as an exercise of their right. John likes to shut down conversation he doesn’t agree with. Nothing analogous about that fella and myself.

I’m not a sell out. Like I said - as the time goes forward, I won’t find myself arguing against this legislation after arguing for it. I’ve been against it all along - because its WRONG!

That however does not mean I’m against legislation. Or rules for that matter. Government isn’t empowered to charge hundreds of dollars and got e people to trade some rights away in order that people be allowed to exercise their rights.

The STATED purpose if government is to protect and defend free exercise of RIGHTS. That is the same for right to free press as it is for bearing arms. As the “journalist” debate goes forward, people might finally realize that the “gun” debate hasn’t been about guns at all - it’s really been about RIGHTS themselves.

Trite as it may be, I’ll ask you this - is government powered to impose a permission slip structure on your ability to carry a bible or a pencil and paper? Must you meet some arbitrary “qualifications” to be “legally” carrying them?

Remember now - Thomas wrote that citizenship is the enabler, the “qualifier” and that all of us have these rights, combined with what Scalia wrote that - the Second amendment is no different.

People have to recognize what this legislative debacle MEANS in terms of RIGHTS, not just in terms of guns. It matters.

Ill leave you with this. What are privileges and immunities in the 14th if not RIGHTS? And, if they are not rights, how can any of us have ANY natural, self evident RIGHTS that government is bound by and to protect?

“I was in five parades on the fourth of July. I didn’t hear one person complain about what I did,” says Governor Pat Quinn while speaking to a Chicago crowd. “I heard many people agree with what I did for common-sense gun safety laws.”

I was at one of those parades, the Glen Ellyn parade. The reason he didn’t hear complaints or boos (believe me, I was ready) is because he was surrounded by 30 supporters constantly shouting, “PAT QUINN, PAT QUINN”. I told the people with me that was the smartest thing he’s done in months.

This current bill is to expensive as it was in Michigan with time the cost will decrease as we get rid those who are anti-gun, as a voter we must know those who do not trust the citzens who they work for there should never be a proffesional politician

I live downstate and think the Governor is probably a decent man but incompetent for his job.

I supported his Amendatory Veto’s but I do recognize his pandering was over the top. I know that has gotten much more publicity than the substance of the legislation which I think was made better with the amendments. I believe it was more respectful of private property rights than the original bill.

that ISRA ad on the radio lauding the carry in New York as a reason crime is down is totally hilarious. so let’s adopt the State of New York carry plan if it’s working so well. Oh, wait, the ISRA was against doing that but now they use it as evidence for their position in a commercial. incredible.

Ahoy- I have seen enough of Quinn’s patronage hiring in this town to know that he is anything but a ‘decent man”. He is an opportunistic, cynical, Chicago pol straight out of the mould that stamps out all the rest of them. I will agree, however, that he is incompetent, and that is his saving grace.

If you are more than a visitor/troll at this site you would know I am nowhere near being a fan of Dick Durbin. Just because I think your absolutist view of the second amendment, shared by almost no one in any position to have impact on the issue, is wrong doesn’t make me a ultra left liberal, as you have suggested. When it comes to large picture issues, at my age I look at things in a less idealistic way than I did when I was younger. If an issue has NO CHANCE IN HELL of every being enacted in the way I truly believe it should, I look to what is more realistically likely. The SCOTUS has held that the second amendment can involve some regulation the likes of which all 50 states have variously engaged in. You seem to seek an end to ALL regulations regarding firearms. While I can agree with you in principle, to an extent, it ain’t never gonna happen. Ever. Never. So why maintain that posture? It’s gotta take alot of effort and I would rather put my energies into things more likely to bear fruit. For example - poking wordslinger and Small Town Liberal every once in a while, somewhat akin to poking a hornet’s nest. That is far more interesting than your pedantic stand point. All you get for your troubles is derision. Most of the time I end up learning alot about stuff even it I don’t agree with the oppostion.

I wonder, if Cullertons follow on bill passes house (which i doubt) does quinn sign it and call it a win or AV it, as not enough, so he can have another big press conference saying that only he is willing to “save us”?

I don’t even know why I’m responding to your nonsense but here it goes.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about or you are being purposely naïve about our Constitution. The Constitution has NEVER EVER been interpreted to be absolute on anything. NEVER. There isn’t one part of the Constitution that hasn’t been subjected to some sort of caveat of one kind or another. The government regulates a lot of things, including charging fees for a lot of things, that you claim somehow infringe on your rights. I can think of dozens of exceptions to the 1st Amendment and that is just one amendment. You are not being denied your rights in this bill. Only silly absolutists like yourself who don’t understand the Constitution in any way, shape or form would say such a ridiculous thing.

How come Guns Save Life didn’t oppose the Duty to Inform provision in the bill, after the Federal court mandated a concealed carry law in December 2012? You state that HB997 was “our proposal.”

Phelps original HB148 carry bill, which failed in May 2011, had DTI with immediate notification. Now Gov. Quinn put IMMEDIATE notiification (like Ohio) in his amendatory veto. Where would he get that idea?

QUESTION: Assuming that a retired CPD officer is qualified for concealed carry under federalHR218 and that he remains within the borders of the State of Illinois. Is the retired officer wasting $75/$100 for annual qualification under HR218? Conversely, how will HB183 affect a retired officer already qualified under HR218?

I think it would depend on where you intend to go. As i read HR218 it would not have the restrictions as listed in HB183. It exempts Qualified LEO’s and Retired LEO’s from State law on CCW. However if you never go to the restricted places seems you would save between $225 and $350 every 5 years.

–”Over the past several weeks, the good people of Illinois have had to endure political showmanship, political gamesmanship, and ultimately political brinkmanship,” commented ISRA Executive Director Richard Pearson. “But, in the end, good sense won out over the gun control extremists and Illinois now has a framework in place to allow citizens to defend themselves.”–

I haven’t heard Phelps or Todd from the NRA say they didn’t have a seat at the table.

wordslinger, John Boch representing GunsSaveLife from Champaign had a seat at the table in spring of 2011, when he and NRA contract lobbyist Todd Vandermyde met with the Chiefs of Police to give them Duty to Inform with criminal penalties, so that their own members could be arrested from time to time to create a little side “business” for the cops and courts.

This has the side benefit of creating job security for Vandermyde to lobby against his own bad bill. The line he was feeding the rubes back in 2011 about DTI was, “we’re going to change that part later.”

Although Boch and GSL board pretend to be a “civil rights organization” which cares about the rights of the downtrodden, such as Otis McDonald in Chicago, Boch and the GSL board never made a peep about DTI since they figured it will never effect them if they live out their lives in small townsville, so they were willing to sell out everyone else in IL if only they could sign off on an UNLIMITED privacy waiver and pack their hoglegs.

Otis and others in Chicago serve to make politically correct plaintiffs for NRA and ISRA, but Boch and the other small town grassroots types really don’t care about anyone outside their county, and they just flat out haven’t go what it takes to match wits with a professional lobbyist like Vandermyde or a politician like Phelps.

Ken from Aurora: “but the fully concealed provision in particular has the danger of sounding reasonable on the surface to low information legislators and voters. Quinn’s other changes are just ridiculous.”

Have you figured out that bad provisions in a bad bill can be misused by police to criminally charge citizens? How about Gov. Quinn’s other “ridiculous” provision in his amendatory veto to to make Duty to Inform notification IMMEDIATE? Know where that came from? Read Rep. Phelps original HB148 carry bill and you’ll see immediate notification. Supplied by NRA contract lobbyist Vandermyde.

DTI, the gift that keeps on giving. Ken, you don’t have to worry about cops arresting you for not being fully concealed when you pack your John Wayne edition six-shooter. Since you are “one of the good guys” and “we’re all on the same side against crime”, every cop you meet will exercise “officer discretion” and write you a warning ticket if you show your piece. Brandon Phelps, and all the good folks at GSL all know that DTI and printing violations are not for good flag wavers like you and the boys at the club, but are only designed to be used to charge the bad people from the wrong side of the tracks,to run them out of town after sundown. That is if “you’re not from around here, are you boy?”

What are you so worried about Ken? ISRA and NRA have the finest lobbyist in the country to represent your interests in Springfield.

Ken, just admit that you and everyone at IGOLD got used and sold out by ISRA and the NRA contract lobbyist. It was slightly heartening to see you start to raise your head out of your stupor and question the provisions of the bill that will actually get armed citizens killed, like DTI and printing as criminal offenses.

Remember the rules, if DTI is a criminal offense, that means the cop can place you under arrest. If he places you under arrest, he has the right to use force if you “resist.” If you are armed when you resist (or he can grab your gun from the console after he shoots you and plant it on you) he then has the right to use deadly force, and get away with it. Criminal penaltes for license violations is cover for legalized murder. Think that’s funny? See how loud you laugh when you get a gun pointed at your head.

You and the rest of the good old boys better go chase the NRA medicine wagon and get a refund on Doc Vandermye’s concealed carry bill. He’s disappearing over the hill, and you got fleeced.

Ron- your idol Vandermyde was scheduled to speak at the GunsSaveLife meeting in Rantoul on Tues.
7-9, but he didn’t show up. Too bad, becase GSL actually has some fairly educated people as members. There were some waiting to ask Vandermyde why he sold out every gun owner in IL by putting DTI w/criminal penalties back in Rep. Phelps “good” carry bill HB997, when the Federal court ORDERED the legislature to pass a carry bill in Dec. 2012.

Some of the more educated people are starting to figure out that the NRA contract lobbyist charged with bringing concealed carry to IL sold out Otis McDonald and every gun owner north of I-80. Go see Vandermyde while you can, but he probably won’t be making many public meetings where he has to answer questions.

But you can contact Chris Cox and Chuck Cunningham at NRA/ILA and compliment them on Vandermyde’s stunning lobbying achievments in IL. Now that we know Vandermyde betrayed his own side with DTI by making a deal with the Chiefs of Police, what’s he got in store next for IL gun owners? Maybe a sellout on AWB too?